Analysis of backcalculated layer moduli and joint load transfer efficiency of airfield rigid pavement
Citation & Export
Hide
Simple citation
Sakulneya, Apidej.
Analysis of backcalculated layer moduli and joint load transfer efficiency of airfield rigid pavement. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-41eb-gr89Export
Description
TitleAnalysis of backcalculated layer moduli and joint load transfer efficiency of airfield rigid pavement
Date Created2019
Other Date2019-10 (degree)
Extent1 online resource (xvi, 126 pages) : illustrations
DescriptionThis study was aimed to analyze the sensitivity of the backcalculation of layer moduli and the joint load transfer efficiency of airfield rigid pavement.
The analyses were designed comprising two main methods. In the first part, the AREA method and the Graphical NUS-BACK solution were primary backcalculation methods. The input condition taken into the backcalculation was a field data of Heavy Weight Deflectometer (HWD) round-up project in the National Airport Pavement Test Facility (NAPT) in Atlantic City, NJ. Initially, the sensitivities of the deflection-based load transfer efficiency (LTE) were evaluated. Subsequently, the backcalculated layer moduli were compared with the lab test data. Those layer moduli were then applied as the input parameters for the overlay design using Federal Aviation Administration Rigid and Flexible Iterative Elastic Layered Design (FAARFIELD) to analyze their influences on the designed overlay thickness. In the second part, Finite Element Analysis Federal Aviation Administration (FEAFAA) was selected as a tool to investigate the stress-based joint load transfer efficiency under various input scenarios including variations in the temperature gradients of slab, landing gear configurations, traffic directions, and slab thicknesses.
The analyzed data from HWD test illustrated several findings. Firstly, the deflection-based LTE was found sensitive to several factors including the assessed position, the amount of load level, test direction, and the adjacent support of the evaluated slab. Secondly, the backcalculated elastic modulus obtained by the AREA method was closely matched to the lab test data whereas the NUS-BACK seemed to be overestimated. The backcalculated modulus of subgrade reaction from both methods was significantly greater than lab test data because they were assumed as a two-layered system in which the property of lower layer represented both the base and the subgrade layers. Thirdly, the overlay thickness calculated by different methods was clearly dissimilar to each other.
Moreover, the FEAFAA results demonstrated certain results. Firstly, the critical stress location for the slab loaded at the corner was more sensitive to different scenarios than those at the edge. Secondly, the combination of temperature gradient and the thickness of the slab predominantly influenced the critical tensile stress and the stress-based LTE of the slab. Thirdly, the value of ratio between the critical stress of 9-slab and the 1-slab pavement system (S9/S1) varied differently to different scenarios. Therefore, the assumption in FAARFIELD that the 25 percent reduction on edge stress accounting for the load transfer may not be suitable under some circumstance.
NoteM.S.
NoteIncludes bibliographical references
Genretheses, ETD graduate
LanguageEnglish
CollectionSchool of Graduate Studies Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Organization NameRutgers, The State University of New Jersey
RightsThe author owns the copyright to this work.
Statistical Profile